McCain -- why the Democrat love-fest? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 05:14 AM

On other threads I am seeing a lot of dems proclaiming McCain as the Republican Messiah, and then for some reason saying that they would vote for him. I have a list of reasons why I would never think of voting for him, but I'd like to see a list of why any Democrat would.

Quote:

Distribute surplus: 23% tax cuts; 62% Social Security. (Jan 2000)
Apply surplus to Social Security, Medicare, tax cuts & debt. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning. (Dec 1995)
Supports Amendment against flag-burning. (Apr 1999)
Supports anti-flag desecration amendment. (Mar 2001)
Affirmative action OK for specific programs, but no quotas. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)
Urges hearings on how FBI can deter Hate Crimes. (Aug 1999)
Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs. (Mar 2000)
$1B for detection equipment for more border interdiction. (Mar 1999)
Stricter penalties; stricter enforcement [for drugs.] (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on spending international development funds on drug control. (Jul 1996)
Strength Clean Air & Water Acts; but not Kyoto. (Jan 2000)
Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted YES on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
Voted NO on do not require ethanol in gasoline. (Aug 1994)
Supports immediate reductions in greenhouse gases. (Sep 1998)
Violence in media caused Littleton shootings. (Apr 1999)
Media Responsibility Act requires video & music labeling. (Jun 1999)
Voted YES on restricting violent videos to minors. (May 1999)
Overthrow “rogue” governments to keep Americans safe. (Feb 2000)
Pay dues to UN after UN reforms. (Jul 1998)
Cuba: No diplomatic and trade relations. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on limiting NATO expansion to only Poland, Hungary & Czech. (Apr 1998)
Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba. (Mar 1996)
Substitute trade treaties for protectionism. (Jan 2000)
Admit China to WTO based on their concessions. (Jun 1999)
No term limits; they throw away the good with the bad. (Jan 2000)
Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts. (Jul 1995)
Ban cheap guns; require safety locks; for gun show checks. (Aug 1999)
Supports ban on certain assault weapons. (Aug 1999)
Guns are a problem, but so are violent web sites & videos. (Aug 1999)
Youth Violence Prevention Act restricts guns for kids. (May 1999)
Higher taxes on cigarettes. (Jan 2000)
Matching funds for seniors citizens’ prescription drugs. (Dec 1999)
Expand health insurance to 11 million uninsured children. (Dec 1999)
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted YES on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Voted NO on 1996 Defense Appropriations. (Sep 1995)
Voted NO on telecomm deregulation. (Feb 1996)
Ethanol is not worth it, even in Iowa. (Dec 1999)
Ethanol bad for environment & bad for consumers. (Nov 1999)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Authorize Clinton to send in ground troops [Kosovo.] (May 1999)
Supported deployment in Bosnia; supports it in Kosovo. (Apr 1999)

From: issues2000

Superbelt · 04-23-2004, 05:46 AM

Why? Because he has principles. Unlike most politicians, and entirely unlike every single high level politician his motivations are always "What is best for the country" And never "what is best for the party" or "what is best for me"

I seldom agree with him on an issue but I feel confident that a man like him will always strive to strengthen this country and not divide it.

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
Why? Because he has principles. Unlike most politicians, and entirely unlike every single high level politician his motivations are always "What is best for the country" And never "what is best for the party" or "what is best for me"

I seldom agree with him on an issue but I feel confident that a man like him will always strive to strengthen this country and not divide it.

I found many instances of McCain voting for a major issue, and then six months later voting or speaking out against it. Read through each line of that link I posted above, and see if he comes off as any less of a saint to you.

tecoyah · 04-23-2004, 06:00 AM

One word- Respect

Mc Cain has earned my respect. I could care less if a man/woman is Dem or Rep. The reason many Democrats go for Mc cain has nothing to do with the party. Democrats in general seem less inclined to be rabid about the "Party" and more in tune with the long run of issues. Because Mc Cain has vision and at least some level of honor, he will draw the respect of those who strive to understand where we , as a country, may want to be in ten or twenty years.
The man has the guts to lead, the voice to speak out, the skill to manipulate, the muscle to kill, and the intellect to avoid killing. Sadly most of these traits are missing from all but a few, who are willing to accept the responsibility of leadership.

In short, He may not be perfect, but he stands out as what many people require in a true leader.

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tecoyah
Democrats in general seem less inclined to be rabid about the "Party" and more in tune with the long run of issues.

I have to guffaw at that remark. Please provide some sources illustrating that Democrats are any less rabid about "Democrat-at-any-cost" than other parties are.

Quote:

Originally posted by tecoyah
Because Mc Cain has vision and at least some level of honor

How are you measuring honor -- by his willingness to attack other Republicans?

tecoyah · 04-23-2004, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
I found many instances of McCain voting for a major issue, and then six months later voting or speaking out against it. Read through each line of that link I posted above, and see if he comes off as any less of a saint to you.

EVERY politician will have a similar record given enough time in power. Did it ever occur to anyone that as times change, needs change and thus policy and opinion changes. Take a close look at the Bush record as Governor/President, or the Clinton record, or JFK,Bush Sr., or anyone else. These silly and misguided attacks on the "character" of a politician are pointless as they can all be manipulated to show whatever the individual wants.
Perhaps it is time we all decided who should lead by looking at what they can do, along with what they have done.

As far as Sainthood, There will never be a saint in the whitehouse. If there was , we would be destroyed in a matter of months, from inside and out. But there is a difference between a saint, and a man of virtue.

Yakk · 04-23-2004, 06:12 AM

Is this your list, or someone else's list?

From the list above, you are anti-free trade "Substitute trade treaties for protectionism. (Jan 2000)", anti-public health care, socially libertarian, anti-contract "Pay dues to UN after UN reforms. (Jul 1998)", something about drugs that isn't clear "Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs. (Mar 2000)", pro-economic warfare "Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)", anti-economic warfare "Cuba: No diplomatic and trade relations. (Jul 1998)", pro-ethanol "Ethanol is not worth it, even in Iowa. (Dec 1999)".

But all of this is a guess. Because all that is up there is a bunch of unsubstantiated vague soundbites. For all I know, half of those could be "he voted for X while making a deal for Y", or "he voted against a stupid bill that, amoung other things, had a clause that could be interprited against that position".

Me, I don't care who McCain is or what he stands for. He isn't likely to be invading my country anytime soon. But, I do find list-style arguements hilarious. "Look at how much is here, some of it MUST be true!"

tecoyah · 04-23-2004, 06:12 AM

As usual, you have managed to create an atmosphere that is not meant to induce civil debate. So, rather than eating the bait, I will go elsewhere. You do have an uncanny ability to demonstrate most of the reasons I left the republican party in the first place though.

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tecoyah
As usual, you have managed to create an atmosphere that is not meant to induce civil debate. So, rather than eating the bait, I will go elsewhere. You do have an uncanny ability to demonstrate most of the reasons I left the republican party in the first place though.

Huh? I'm not a Republican..

Bill O'Rights · 04-23-2004, 06:43 AM

^^Nope. He's a Libertarian.

Which, by the way, so am I. I just so happen to be pro-McCain.

Superbelt · 04-23-2004, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Said by seretogis
I have to guffaw at that remark. Please provide some sources illustrating that Democrats are any less rabid about "Democrat-at-any-cost" than other parties are.

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
On other threads I am seeing a lot of dems proclaiming McCain as the Republican Messiah, and then for some reason saying that they would vote for him. I have a list of reasons why I would never think of voting for him, but I'd like to see a list of why any Democrat would.

You contradict yourself.

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
You contradict yourself.

No, my theory is that Democrats like McCain because he is the anti-Republican. He's the Republican that talks shit about other Republicans, and so is a means to an end. This doesn't make Democrats any more bipartisan.

Superbelt · 04-23-2004, 07:02 AM

He talks shit about democrats too. And he is not Anti-Republican. He is just a paleo-conservative. The kind that was in fashion around the time of Reagan rather than the neo-cons who control everything now. The people in charge now are the anti-republicans. There is hardly a position of Republicans now that mesh with what they proclaim to be. Smaller government, less spending, less intrusive in peoples lives. THAT's a republican.

Many of us would actually vote for him AS A REPUBLICAN. I would be very happy with McCain as our Republican president right now. If he were he could maybe pull the party back to it's roots.

iccky · 04-23-2004, 07:05 AM

I, too, am confused by the Democratic love-fest for mcCain, though from the other end, as a Democrat.

For me, the issue isn't what party he's a member of, its issues. McCain wants to do things that I think are bad for the country. He wants to drill in ANWAR. He was recently rated the number one pro-taxpayer senator by the national taxpayer's union. He has a lifetime rating of %17 from the AFL-CIO. He supported Bush's rush to war. He's pro-life.

I'll admit that McCain takes what I think is a more rational approach to some of these issues. Rather then just take away abortion rights, he wants to take away abortion rights and make adoption easier as an alternative to abortion. I respect that, but I'd rather have someone who belives in abortion rights.

So while I appriciate McCain's honor, leadership ability, and willingness to look to the long-term, I won't support him. His vision of Amreca's long-term is radically different from mine. I'm not going to change my views simply because a charismatic politician supports the opposite. I encourage my fellow Democrats to look byond McCain's obvious charisma to what he actually wants to do to the country.

bond007 · 04-23-2004, 07:13 AM

re: the Democratic love-fest for McCain...

I think it's along the lines of... the enemy of the enemy is my friend.

McCain is pretty much anti-Bush, which endears him greatly to the Democrats.

seretogis · 04-23-2004, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superbelt
Smaller government, less spending, less intrusive in peoples lives. THAT's a republican.

Many of us would actually vote for him AS A REPUBLICAN. I would be very happy with McCain as our Republican president right now. If he were he could maybe pull the party back to it's roots.

This is where I am confused -- why is a Democrat saying that he would vote for McCain as a Republican? It seems that Republicans tried to become more like Democrats in policy in order to attract Dem voters. Instead, it's caused some Dems to recognize the importance of Reaganesque ideals -- are political parties flipping? In twenty years will the Democrats be the party of "small government, less spending" and the Republicans the neo-Socialists? An interesting thought.

Sparhawk · 04-23-2004, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
This is where I am confused -- why is a Democrat saying that he would vote for McCain as a Republican? It seems that Republicans tried to become more like Democrats in policy in order to attract Dem voters. Instead, it's caused some Dems to recognize the importance of Reaganesque ideals -- are political parties flipping? In twenty years will the Democrats be the party of "small government, less spending" and the Republicans the neo-Socialists? An interesting thought.

To some extent that is already happening. The American people already no longer see the Republican party as the party of "smaller government, smaller spending," so there might be some truth there.

Superbelt · 04-23-2004, 07:51 AM

No, I just like seeing balance and moderation. Nationwide, we don't have that. We have a full on right wing leadership.
At the party levels the Democrats are about as moderate as they will be. Yes I know things are starting to lean more liberal but that is mostly just a isolated backlash against the full on dominance of the right. The Republicans on the other hand have severely tilted right in recent years.

I like divided government, I like moderation. I think it is in the best interest of America. I'll vote for it even if it doesn't totally mesh with all of my beliefs.

04-23-2004, 06:00 AM	#4 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	One word- Respect Mc Cain has earned my respect. I could care less if a man/woman is Dem or Rep. The reason many Democrats go for Mc cain has nothing to do with the party. Democrats in general seem less inclined to be rabid about the "Party" and more in tune with the long run of issues. Because Mc Cain has vision and at least some level of honor, he will draw the respect of those who strive to understand where we , as a country, may want to be in ten or twenty years. The man has the guts to lead, the voice to speak out, the skill to manipulate, the muscle to kill, and the intellect to avoid killing. Sadly most of these traits are missing from all but a few, who are willing to accept the responsibility of leadership. In short, He may not be perfect, but he stands out as what many people require in a true leader. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

04-23-2004, 06:12 AM	#7 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	Is this your list, or someone else's list? From the list above, you are anti-free trade "Substitute trade treaties for protectionism. (Jan 2000)", anti-public health care, socially libertarian, anti-contract "Pay dues to UN after UN reforms. (Jul 1998)", something about drugs that isn't clear "Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs. (Mar 2000)", pro-economic warfare "Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)", anti-economic warfare "Cuba: No diplomatic and trade relations. (Jul 1998)", pro-ethanol "Ethanol is not worth it, even in Iowa. (Dec 1999)". But all of this is a guess. Because all that is up there is a bunch of unsubstantiated vague soundbites. For all I know, half of those could be "he voted for X while making a deal for Y", or "he voted against a stupid bill that, amoung other things, had a clause that could be interprited against that position". Me, I don't care who McCain is or what he stands for. He isn't likely to be invading my country anytime soon. But, I do find list-style arguements hilarious. "Look at how much is here, some of it MUST be true!" __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

04-23-2004, 06:12 AM	#8 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	As usual, you have managed to create an atmosphere that is not meant to induce civil debate. So, rather than eating the bait, I will go elsewhere. You do have an uncanny ability to demonstrate most of the reasons I left the republican party in the first place though. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

04-23-2004, 06:43 AM	#10 (permalink)
Bill O'Rights will always be an Alyson Hanniganite Location: In the dust of the archives	^^Nope. He's a Libertarian. Which, by the way, so am I. I just so happen to be pro-McCain. __________________ "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

04-23-2004, 05:46 AM	#2 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Why? Because he has principles. Unlike most politicians, and entirely unlike every single high level politician his motivations are always "What is best for the country" And never "what is best for the party" or "what is best for me" I seldom agree with him on an issue but I feel confident that a man like him will always strive to strengthen this country and not divide it.

04-23-2004, 07:02 AM	#13 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	He talks shit about democrats too. And he is not Anti-Republican. He is just a paleo-conservative. The kind that was in fashion around the time of Reagan rather than the neo-cons who control everything now. The people in charge now are the anti-republicans. There is hardly a position of Republicans now that mesh with what they proclaim to be. Smaller government, less spending, less intrusive in peoples lives. THAT's a republican. Many of us would actually vote for him AS A REPUBLICAN. I would be very happy with McCain as our Republican president right now. If he were he could maybe pull the party back to it's roots.

04-23-2004, 07:05 AM	#14 (permalink)
iccky Psycho Location: Princeton, NJ	I, too, am confused by the Democratic love-fest for mcCain, though from the other end, as a Democrat. For me, the issue isn't what party he's a member of, its issues. McCain wants to do things that I think are bad for the country. He wants to drill in ANWAR. He was recently rated the number one pro-taxpayer senator by the national taxpayer's union. He has a lifetime rating of %17 from the AFL-CIO. He supported Bush's rush to war. He's pro-life. I'll admit that McCain takes what I think is a more rational approach to some of these issues. Rather then just take away abortion rights, he wants to take away abortion rights and make adoption easier as an alternative to abortion. I respect that, but I'd rather have someone who belives in abortion rights. So while I appriciate McCain's honor, leadership ability, and willingness to look to the long-term, I won't support him. His vision of Amreca's long-term is radically different from mine. I'm not going to change my views simply because a charismatic politician supports the opposite. I encourage my fellow Democrats to look byond McCain's obvious charisma to what he actually wants to do to the country.

04-23-2004, 07:13 AM	#15 (permalink)
bond007 Junkie Location: too far from Texas	re: the Democratic love-fest for McCain... I think it's along the lines of... the enemy of the enemy is my friend. McCain is pretty much anti-Bush, which endears him greatly to the Democrats.

04-23-2004, 07:51 AM	#18 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	No, I just like seeing balance and moderation. Nationwide, we don't have that. We have a full on right wing leadership. At the party levels the Democrats are about as moderate as they will be. Yes I know things are starting to lean more liberal but that is mostly just a isolated backlash against the full on dominance of the right. The Republicans on the other hand have severely tilted right in recent years. I like divided government, I like moderation. I think it is in the best interest of America. I'll vote for it even if it doesn't totally mesh with all of my beliefs.